Directors: Modern Vs Classics

Started by Zack M1 pages
Zack M Senior Member

Directors: Modern Vs Classics

Do you have a preference with directors when you compare the modern ones to the Classic or older ones?

Which side is superior overall?
Classics:

Hitchcock
Scorsese
Kubrick
Chaplin
Spielberg
Lumet
Wilder
Coppola
Kurosawa
Orson Welles
David Lynch

Modern:

Peter Jackson
Christopher Nolan
Darren Aronofsky
Tim Burton
Clint Eastwood
JJ Abrahams
Paul Thomas Anderson
Coen Brothers
Quentin Tarantino
Spike Jonze

Firefly218 Restricted

Classics easily. Tarantino made me pause a little, but outside of him all the listed modern guys are out of their league.

Patient_Leech Perfect Organism

Where do Cronenberg and George Miller lie?

And Scorsese is still making great modern films. So I think the industry is evolving so that directors need a good combination of classic and modern. But yeah, I tend to agree that the more old school films are often better because they focused more on human interaction and performances/story and don't try to wrap humans around technology that they want to show off. I hate to mention him, but to illustrate my point: Michael Bay, the epitome of just wanting to use special effects.

Zack M Senior Member

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Where do Cronenberg and George Miller lie?

And Scorsese is still making great modern films. So I think the industry is evolving so that directors need a good combination of classic and modern. But yeah, I tend to agree that the more old school films are often better because they focused more on human interaction and performances/story and don't try to wrap humans around technology that they want to show off. I hate to mention him, but to illustrate my point: Michael Bay, the epitome of just wanting to use special effects.

I had a hard time placing Lynch as well. I just put him on classic, because he's done so many contemporary classics 3 decades ago.

Firefly218 Restricted

Originally posted by Zack M
I had a hard time placing Lynch as well. I just put him on classic, because he's done so many contemporary classics 3 decades ago.

Blue Velvet was the most disturbing and mentally scarring film I ever saw. I saw it when I was maybe 12 and now 6 years later it still gives me goosebumps. Lynch is a genius IMO.

jinXed by JaNx Senior Member

I don't think this is a very productive debate to get involved with because regardless of how objective we all try to be it's going to come down to personal preference of some kind.

I would say that directors and filmmakers from decades past were more resourceful but i don't think that necessarily makes them better. Although, it could be argued as such.

The biggest thing i look for in a director is the impact their film has on me. There are many variables that go into deciding how and why a movie left a lasting impression on me but the most important thing is whether or not it did. As a cinema fan i only judge a film on well it told it's story with the tools that were available.

There are so many technical issues that we would have to consider and analyze if we were going to argue which era of filmmakers were better at their craft. The important thing is that there are still incredible films being made by brilliant story tellers today. In fact, the reason why it may appear that there aren't as many "great" movies being made today is because there is just so many being made. There are probably triple the amount of quality films being made today compared to thirty-forty years ago. It's just that we get ten shitty ones with every great one, which i think is a fair ratio.